Posts

Religious Attitudes in Evolutionism

Image
Uninformed evolutionists believe that Charles Darwin came up with his hypothesis all by his lonesome, and deny that evolution is actually an ancient religion ( Paul debated the Epicurean philosophers in Acts 17 , who were evolutionists way back then). The science aspect had been in the works for years before Darwin popularized it. However, even with the trappings of science, evolution is still religious in nature . Using presuppositions that evolution happened, proponents use that as their starting point when attempting to interpret evidence — especially anthropologists. Of course, many questions remain unanswered, and their speculations often raise more questions than they claim to answer. The real answer is that evolution did not happen, everything was created. There’s something magical about believing in evolutionary anthropology: a sense of numinous awe at how much they don’t know but believe might be possible. A man ponders a bone in his hands, holding it as if it were a

Homosexual "Marriage", Creation, and the Bible

Image
by Cowboy Bob Sorensen There are about 30 links provided for further reading, curiosity, and research. They can be springboards for people who want to do further research. Each should open in a new window or tab when clicked. I do not endorse every site, or even every article, so I do expect all y'all to utilize your own minds. As most people expected, the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) voted to legalize same-sex "marriage" . This has serious implications for Bible-believing Christians , not only in the US, but everywhere. But it's not like the US was the first country to do this, just the latest to date . Let me point out right now that some professing Christians are expressing rage over the ruling. Frustration and righteous anger are understandable (especially when faced with the ridicule and gloating of "gay rights" supporters), but there is no justification for acting in a sinful manner toward homosexuals! Those who demand

Viewing Dinosaurs and Logical Fallacies from the Bunker

Image
by Cowboy Bob Sorensen Lots of reading, listening, and viewing for you today. Derek Gilbert allowed me back on "A View from the Bunker" , and it was a combination of two main points. First, we discussed dinosaur soft tissues and other evidence that dinosaur fossils are not millions of years old. Next, we went into an area of special study of mine, logical fallacies . We had some fun, too. The logical fallacies are important so that Christians and creationists are not lassoed by atheists and anti-creationists, and learning about them carries over into other areas of life. I gave several examples from my own experience. Also, I mentioned my article on " Evolution and the New Atheo-Fascism ", which deals with some of the material. Many shows have a fair amount of "show prep" before recording. Not here, it just a little. I prepped myself beforehand, but didn't use my notes all that much. It was more of a free-flowing conversation. Different sh

Evolutionists Should Remain Low-Key About "Loki" Organisms

Image
Advocates of Lokiarchaeota-to-locksmith evolution assume that such evolution is true and backed by observable science. However, they keep searching for missing links to support their conjectures, whether it clinging to the defunct "Lucy" knuckle-walker story, or this instance of Lokiarchaeota as an missing link way back yonder in the single-celled years. Lokiarchaeota (nicknamed "Loki") has them all a-twitter. The "science" is dismal, to say the least. Genomic information is seriously lacking, but that doesn't stop some evolutionary biologists from speculating, making assertions, telling comic-book-style stories, and just plain getting excited about finding another alleged missing link. Darwinists assemble! Pay homage to the god Evolution! Puny god. The evidence supports the real God, our Creator. Single-celled organisms called Lokiarchaeota are making headlines as missing links in our supposed single-celled ancestry. A small fraction of thei

Circular Reasoning and a British Jurassic Fossil

Image
Evolutionary paleontologists are known for using circular reasoning . They deny this, of course, but take a look-see: The age of an index fossil is determined by the rock layer where it was located. The age of the rock layer is determined by the index fossil. Then they lay out the geologic column according to their long-age belief system and put it in textbooks. Looks good in books, because the geologic column you see there doesn't exist in nature. Whitby Lighthouses / PublicDomainPictures / Pixabay The cliffs at Whitby, England, down by the seashore (where maybe Sally sells seashells) are eroding and giving up some fossils. Most are no big deal, but there was one big deal, a Jurassic fossil. Circular reasoning and dating according to worldviews ensues, and a great time is had by all. However, the real world is not convenient for evolutionists. Instead, erosion rates and fossil yields support not only a young world, but indicate the global catastrophe called the Genesis Floo

No Signs of Bat Evolution

Image
As a child, I didn't bother to think much about bats, mainly because I didn't see them very much. Just thought they were mice with wings that might attack you. The concept that a bat is a rodent that grew wings and took off into the night sky is way, way off in left field. No, they won't seek to attack you, and many are beneficial by eating insects . They have an extremely advanced echolocation system and flight controls. Proponents of dust-to-dark-knight evolution tell stories about how the bat evolved, but there isn't a shred of evidence for it — old fossil bats are like today's living bats. In addition, the echolocation system and advanced flight control are amazingly complex; everything has to be working together all at the same time, or nothing works at all. The bat did not evolve, it was created. You don’t just put wings on a naked mole rat and make it fly. Bats are designed to be aero-bat-ic champions. A primer on bat flight in Current Biology by A

Naturalism, Evolution, and the Bible

Image
Quite a few people don't cotton to the notion that science is a philosophy. You may hear something like, "Science is science", as if it was a separate animal. But if you stop to ponder on it for a spell, you'll see that science (and the scientific methods) have philosophical foundations, as you can see in these definitions of science . However, science is also defined with naturalistic philosophies. That is, even though the logical conclusion of analysis is God, don't go there, girlfriend — the powers that be disapprove because of their naturalistic worldview. In the 2005 Dover trial , "science" defeated "religion", even though Intelligent Design is not a Christian doctrine per se, so the foolish verdict was rendered on the basis of definitions from philosophy. How did we get there? In early days, Bible-believing scientists were making all sorts of discoveries and advancing science. Along came naturalistic philosophies, and the Christ